Anyhow, I've been away a long time, but am now back into the Trek Tech thing. At one time, I developed a theory on phaser operation, involving things like "cascade nadion reactions" and a particle I invented to do the job called a "chromion" (named in honor of the color charge of the strong nuclear force). A few folks liked it. I was just wondering if anything new had popped up in the Techy circle on this?

P.S. Anyone remember the "Gigawatt Brigade" and the "Terawatt Terrorists"? That was good fun...

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!

quote:

---

Originally posted by David Templar:
Um, my critism about phasers types weren't meant as an attack against you personally, akb1979. We can restart the debate over phaser type here, if you like. Though the guy who wanted to discuss phaser mechanics might be disappointed.

---

Yeah, don't make me bust a rapid nadion up in here...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vogon Poet:
This is the kind of discussion I point to whenever someone asks me why I don't have ship-mounted phasers on my site. . .

---

LOL, you still haven't made that addition about the type 2 phaser being used as some sort of forcefield generator in that episode of TNG when Picard falls in love with that science officer, just like how B'Elanna used a phaser in that Voyager episode.

Anyhoo, here's my two cents on one of the major disagreements of the previous phaser thread: array vs bank.

Defination of "bank": http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=bank

Let's start with phaser banks, because they predated the array, being featured on every Starfleet ship before the Ambassador, and since then, the Defiant. I define phaser banks as a set of phaser emitters whose operational capacity does not directly depend on the capacity of its neighbouring emitters. The emitters of a phaser bank contains its own independent prefire chambers, rather than using the coupling effect of phaser arrays. Since this means that the individual emitters of a phaser bank has a lot fewer prefire chambers to work with, I believe that they rely on much larger sets of prefire chambers. This would probably mean that they cut a lot more into the internal volume of a starship, compared to phaser arrays. Also, their localized natural would make them more vulnerable to enemy fire, not to mention they'd have less redundancy and firing arc coverage due to their small numbers. I also believe that older "bank" form emitters uses only a single emitter crystal, which has to be mechanically aimed, decreasing the phaser's accuracy and reliability. However, I think that phaser banks packs a heavier punch in some ways. A single emitter from a phaser bank can generate the same output as several dozen emitters of a phaser array, but you can fit hundreds of array emitters on a starship. The biggest type of starship phaser banks is probably found on the Excelsior, the smallest on shuttlepods.

Defination of "array": http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=array

I define phaser arrays as a set of phaser emitters which operates in concert with each other. Each emitter contains only a relatively small prefire chamber, but is able to pass on its phaser energy to the next emitter, which adds that energy and passes it on to the next emitter over, through "force coupling". As a penalty, the individual emitters are almost ineffective on their own, since their small prefire chamber limits their individual output dramatically. However, when working with its sister emitters, the biggest limitation to their output becomes the length of the phaser "strip". Benefits to using phaser strips includes their relatively low use of a vessel's internal volume, excellent firing arcs, flexibility (the ability for the same array to fire multiple beams) and redundancy to battle damage due to the number of emitters in a strip. Their major limitation is that you have to fit a large number of them onto a starship inorder for them to be effective. They're also much more visible than bank-type emitters, which might cause some concern with the more civil Starfleet types. The biggest type of starship arrays in found on the Sovereign (and Prometheus?), the smallest on Runabouts.

Note: I really don't care about the words "bank" and "array", they're just words to convey meanings. No point in arguing over words rather than meaning.

[ December 04, 2001: Message edited by: David Templar ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by David Templar:
The biggest type of starship arrays in found on the Sovereign (and Prometheus?), the smallest on Runabouts.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by David Templar:
Um, my critism about phasers types weren't meant as an attack against you personally, akb1979.

---

quote:

---

We can restart the debate over phaser type here, if you like.

---

To be honest, I can't be arsed - too much effort.

quote:

---

Though the guy who wanted to discuss phaser mechanics might be disappointed.

---

Probably.

quote:

---

Anyhoo, if you really want an @ss-whooping, there's a guy auctioning his services on E-bay. I don't have the time or inclination to fly all the way over to where ever you are just so I can tie some complete stranger's legs around his neck and stuff them down his throat, even if he was paying for my trip. Well, maybe if there was an anime con there at the time.

---

AND is all that I have to say.

[ December 04, 2001: Message edited by: akb1979 ]

[ December 04, 2001: Message edited by: akb1979 ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Shik:

I take issue with this statement. I sincerely do not believe that length of an array makes any difference. Indeed, this concept would then make Sovereigns & Prometheus far LESS powerful than a Galaxy saucer array by sheer dint of being shorter. This has been shown & stated to not be the case.

---

Um, the Sovereign mounts Type-XII phaser emitters, the Galaxy mounts Type-X. Apparently the Type-XII is powerful enough to surpass Type-Xs, even with less emitters involved. Strip size matters, but so does emitter types.

quote:

---

Also, how do you account for "special types" such as the Miranda-class rollbar unit (the so-called "megaphaser"), the Norway-class single centerline-mounted emitter, & the Defiant-class pulse cannons in this theory?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ace:
If array emitters are so dependent on length, what's the point of having the small aft phaser arrays on the Galaxy, Intrepid, and other newer vessels? Why wouldn't they just put a phaser bank there instead?

---

Um, you generally try to stick to the same type of weapons on a ship to ease logistics and maintainance. And like I said, phaser banks takes up more internal volume than arrays. The aft area is never seen as very tactically important anyways, even though that's a mistake. Besides, it's usually covered by one or more torpedo launchers.

quote:

---

Why divide the Intrepid's main phaser arrays in half? We've never seen a tactical officer use both arrays at once (or have we?).

---

I blame silliness. The upper strip is seperated by stuff, but there's probably no reason why the lower strip should have been divided in two. Maybe they wanted symmetry in the design.

We've seen all four arrays firing at once in VOY, IIRC.

quote:

---

I know it's official now, but I still don't see why the Enterprise-E has to have Type-XII phasers...oooh, so much better than the whimpy Type-X!

---